Il continuum pragmatico della scortesia nei luoghi della conflittualità romana codificata. Una proposta teorica a partire da dati ciceroniani

The study investigates the dynamics of verbal impoliteness within public oratory in republican Rome, applying modern theories of pragmatics and linguistic politeness to the study of classical texts, based on the possible overlap of the sociological concept of "face" with the Roman concept of dignitas. Through the analysis of several famous orations by Cicero and a comparison with selected passages from the same author's rhetorical works, the thesis examines how public orators managed the delicate balance between the code of decorum and the antagonism inherent in contexts of institutionalized conflict. The intersection of theoretical reflection and oratorical practice shows that the strategic use of impoliteness was an authorized communicative resource for the orator performing in the courts, as well as in the senate and public assemblies: it constituted the best tool for breaking down the position of a polemical interlocutor, intimidating witnesses during interrogations, or denigrating political opponents, while simultaneously forging a bond of complicity with the audience and any presiding jury. The work proposes an initial outline of the impoliteness continuum in public contentio, ranging from more mitigated and permissible forms of disagreement, to personal invective and the use of highly emotional language, all the way to forms of aggression that go beyond the norm and are detrimental to the speaker's own face.